A New Mexico jury has determined that Meta Platforms violated state consumer protection laws. This proceeding stems from a lawsuit filed by the state’s attorney general, which accused the company of providing misleading information regarding the safety of its platforms and failing to implement adequate measures against online child exploitation.
Central to the case were the company’s social media platforms: Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. According to the prosecution, these tools allegedly enabled dangerous individuals to establish contact with underage users, facilitating interactions that in some instances resulted in real-world abuse.
The New Mexico Jury’s Decision
After less than a day of deliberation, the jury found the company responsible, imposing a civil penalty of $375 million, approximately €345 million. This marks the first time a jury has directly ruled on such accusations against Meta, which has faced numerous proceedings in recent years concerning the impact of its platforms on the mental health of young people.
(Image caption: Mark Zuckerberg photographed outside the courthouse during the legal proceedings against Meta)
Meta has announced its intention to appeal the decision, emphasizing the inherent difficulties in identifying and removing harmful content and malicious actors. New Mexico authorities, however, hailed the verdict as a significant development, highlighting the critical need to hold large technology companies accountable for managing online risks.
The trial, which lasted six weeks and concluded in Santa Fe, brought to light structural deficiencies in content moderation and the protection of the most vulnerable users. According to the prosecution, for years, insufficient measures were taken to prevent illicit contact between adults and minors. A second phase of the proceedings is scheduled for May, during which potential mandatory platform modifications and additional sanctions will be evaluated. The state had originally sought over $2 billion in damages, approximately €1.84 billion. Despite the reduced penalty, this case could still have repercussions on other similar proceedings and help redefine liability standards for online services catering to a global audience.